@agbeltran can you maybe have a look at where we are on this? If there are serious concerns about what I thought was consensus, and both @agreiner and @andrea-perego seem to disagree, maybe we should consider to either fall back to the silence of DCAT-2014, or see if we can, in the next few days, come up with text that gives advice for various approaches?
I am biased because of a discussion around the EU DCAT-AP where no consensus could be reached and people argued that whatever they did was legal. What I am trying to avoid is situations like for example https://datahub.io/sports-data/spanish-la-liga, where a bunch of files are thrown in distributions without descriptions -- in the example, a user would need to infer the season from the file name. But I must admit that this is what some publishers have, and recommending one approach or the other makes it harder for them to produce DCAT-conformant data. As I wrote earlier, it's the tension between interoperability -- trying to make the landscape more coherent -- and flexibility -- making it easier for publishers to do what they want and declare conformance with DCAT.
--
GitHub Notification of comment by makxdekkers
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/pull/789#issuecomment-470854847 using your GitHub account